Hemant Gupta, CJ.

The challenge in the present petition in public interest, is to an order-dated 25.9.2017, passed by respondent No. 3 Chairman, Jabalpur Development Authority, Jabalpur (for short "the Authority") whereby respondent No. 4 Madhya Pradesh Kesharwani Shiksha Samiti (for short "the Society") was permitted to deposit a sum of Rs. 93,93,699/- within one month and thereafter the Authority was directed to handover possession of the allotted land to the Society. The said respondent was also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) per hut existing on the land for the rehabilitation of the occupants at an alternate place.

2. In pursuance to an advertisement issued by the Authority on 31.5.2005 in respect of allotment of Plot measuring 18,866 square meters, for educational purpose, the bid of respondent No. 4 - the Society was accepted on 22.8.2005. A regular letter of allotment was issued on 26.10.2005 Annexure P/6. The total premium amount was Rs.1,15,27,126/- and that a sum of Rs. 28,81,782/- as 25% of the amount, was to be deposited on or before 12.9.2005. It is contemplated that if the amount is not deposited within three months or in installments, the lease can be cancelled in terms of Clause 21 of the application form. The Society deposited an amount of Rs. 7,50,000/- on 12/22.09.2005; and Rs. 21,31,782/- on 14.10.2005 towards 25% of the initial amount. The Society deposited further Rs.15 Lakhs on 1.8.2007, and the remaining amount of Rs. 71,21,991/- on 26.5.2012.

On account of delayed payment, interest amounting to Rs. 83,29,397/- and 15% cess amount amounting to Rs. 10,64,302/-, totalling Rs. 93,93,699/- was to be deposited upto 30.6.2012. The Society challenged the said demand in Writ Petition No. 16620/2012. In the said writ petition, direction was issued to the Chairman of Authority on 29.6.2017 to decide the representation in terms of Clause 32 of Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Niyam, 1975 (for short the "Rules"). It is in pursuance of such direction, the impugned order has been passed.

3. The sole argument of learned counsel for the petitioners is that in terms of Rule 23 of the Rules, the balance amount of premium is to be deposited within five years and not any later. Since the balance 75% was not deposited within five years, therefore, the lease granted to the Society is deemed to have been cancelled.

4. Earlier the allotment of the lease was cancelled on 7.8.2008, for the reason that the Society has not deposited the premium amount. The Society submitted a representation that it is ready to deposit the balance amount within 15 days, but Authority has to remove the drain and the illegal occupants/encroachers on the said land. Another notice was issued to the Society on 28.8.2012, calling upon to pay the remaining amount. Against the demand raised, the Society filed a writ petition No. 16620 of 2012 inter alia on the ground that there were encroachments and a drain on the land. This Court on 29.6.2017 permitted the Society to submit a representation with a direction to the Authority to consider the representation in accordance with the Rules. It is thereafter the impugned order was passed.

5. The petitioners earlier filed Writ Petition No. 8712/2013, wherein the Division Bench of this Court passed the following order on 10.7.2014:-

"It is not in dispute that the petitioner has made representation to the concerned Authorities vide Annexure P/9, but has not been communicated about the outcome thereof. In our considered opinion, it is appropriate that the grievance of the petitioner is first examined by some senior official in the Administration such as Commissioner Jabalpur Division, who is also discharging the role as Chairman of Jabalpur Development Authority.

Accordingly, we direct the Commissioner Jabalpur Division/In-charge Chairman of Jabalpur Development Authority to examine the grievance made by the petitioner in representation (Annexure P/9) / any further rep